2025:KER:30425 Crl.M.C.No.6264 of 2019 -1- IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE G.GIRISH TUESDAY, THE 8TH DAY OF APRIL 2025 / 18TH CHAITHRA, 1947 CRL.MC NO.6264 OF 2019 CRIME NO.968/2015 OF CENTRAL POLICE STATION, ERNAKULAM IN CC NO.978 OF 2015 OF JUDICIAL FIRST CLASS MAGISTRATE COURT - II, ERNAKULAM PETITIONERS/ACCUSED NOS.1 TO 3: 1 PREM CHANDER AGED 42 YEARS, S/O SUNDARAMOORTHY, SAKTHI VEEDU, KIZHAKETHARA, KUNISERRY POST, ERUMAYUR-II VILLAGE, PALAKKAD DISTRICT, PIN - 678 681. NOW RESIDING AT NO.2, WEST CHANTRY, HARROW, LONDON, H A 36 N X, UNITED KINGDOM 2 GIRIJA SUNDARAMOORTHY AGED 66 YEARS, W/O SUNDARAMOORTHY, SAKTHI VEEDU, KIZHAKETHARA, KUNISERRY POST, ERUMAYUR-II VILLAGE, PALAKKAD DISTRICT, PIN - 678 681 3 KARTHIK SUNDARAMOORTHY AGED 43 YEARS, S/O SUNDARAMOORTHY, SAKTHI, KIZHAKETHARA, KUNISERRY POST, PALAKKAD, PIN - 678 681 BY ADV. RAJESH SIVARAMANKUTTY RESPONDENTS/STATE/DEFACTO COMPLAINANT: 1 THE STATE OF KERALA REPRESENTED BY THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM - 31 2025:KER:30425 Crl.M.C.No.6264 of 2019 -2- 2 AMMU AJITH AGED 38 YEARS, D/O B.R.AJITH, DOOR NO.7132, 7TH BLOCK, PRESTIGE NEPTUNE'S COURTYARD, MARINE DRIVE, ERNAKULAM - 18 BY ADVS. SRI.A.V.THOMAS (SR.) SMT.GISA SUSAN THOMAS SMT.REVATHI A.K. SMT.VIDYAJITH M. SHRI.SIJO PHILIP SRI SANGEETHARAJ NR, PP THIS CRIMINAL MISC. CASE HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 08.04.2025, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: 2025:KER:30425 Crl.M.C.No.6264 of 2019 -3- G. GIRISH, J. ----------------------------- Crl.M.C.No.6264 of 2019 ------------------------------------- Dated this the 8th day of April, 2025 ORDER The petitioners are accused Nos.1 to 3 in C.C.No.978 of 2015 on the files of the Judicial First Class Magistrate Court - II, Ernakulam. The offences alleged against them are under Sections 341, 323, 294(b) and 506(I) read with Section 34 IPC. In the present petition, the petitioners seek to quash the proceedings in the said case. 2. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioners, the learned counsel representing the 2nd respondent / defacto complainant, and the learned Public Prosecutor representing the State of Kerala. 3. The incident which resulted in the registration of this crime is said to have happened on 31.05.2015 in a Mall at Ernakulam. The complaint is that the 1st petitioner, who is the former husband of CW1, along with petitioners 2 and 3 who are his mother and brother, had wrongfully restrained the 2nd respondent and twisted her hands, 2025:KER:30425 Crl.M.C.No.6264 of 2019 -4- in addition to showering verbal abuses and criminally intimidating her at the time when they were in the said Mall to fulfill the requirement of visitorial rights of the 1st petitioner over the child of 2nd respondent and the 1st petitioner, as per the directions of this Court in the judgment dated 19.09.2014 in OP(FC) No.434 of 2014. CW1 (2nd respondent) is said to have reported the matter to the police control room immediately after the incident. The crime has been registered by the Ernakulam Central Police on 01.06.2015, that is the day next to the date of incident, on the basis of the First Information Statement given by CW1. The Investigating Officer took the statements of the witnesses including CWs 3 and 4, who are independent witnesses, who happened to be there in the Mall at the time when the incident took place. On going through the statement given by the defacto complainant (CW1), and also the evidence relied on by the prosecution through the statements of CWs 3 and 4, it is not possible to say that no such incident as alleged by the defacto complainant took place on 31.05.2015. It is also not possible to say that the allegations levelled by the defacto complainant would not 2025:KER:30425 Crl.M.C.No.6264 of 2019 -5- constitute the offences of wrongful restraint causing voluntary hurt and uttering obscene words in public place. 4. In the above circumstances, it is not possible for this Court to invoke the inherent powers under Section 482 Cr.P.C. to nip the prosecution in the bud in a case like this. The truth or falsity of the statements of the witnesses are to be tested in the trial to be conducted before the learned Magistrate. The mere fact that there had been matrimonial discord between the 1st petitioner and CW1, is not a reason to think that a false case has been foisted by CW1 against the petitioners. Therefore, I am of the view that the prayer in this petition to terminate the prosecution proceedings initiated against the petitioners, is devoid of merit. Accordingly, the petition is hereby dismissed. Sd/- G. GIRISH JUDGE ded 2025:KER:30425 Crl.M.C.No.6264 of 2019 -6- APPENDIX OF CRL.MC 6264/2019 PETITIONER ANNEXURES ANNEXURE A TRUE COPY OF THE JOINT PETITIONER IN I.A.NO. 12682/2014 IN O.P.(F.C) NO. 434/2014 FILED BY THE 1ST PETITIONER AND 2ND RESPONDENT BEFORE THIS HON'BLE COURT ANNEXURE B TRUE COPY OF THE JUDGMENT DATED 19-9-2014 IN O.P.(FC) NO. 434/2014 PASSED BY THIS HON'BLE COURT ANNEXURE C CERTIFIED COPY OF THE ORAL COMPLAINT MADE FROM THE RESIDENCE OF THE 2ND RESPONDENT TO THE POLICE ON 1-6-2015 AT 3.30 P.M. ANNEXURE D CERTIFIED COPY OF THE FIT DT. 1-6-2015 REGISTERED AT ERNAKULAM CENTRAL POLICE STATION AGAINST THE 1ST AND 2ND PETITIONERS AND ONE KISHORE AS 2ND ACCUSED ANNEXURE E CERTIFIED COPY OF THE FINAL REPORT IN C.C.NO.978/2015 RESPONDENT ANNEXURES ANNEXURE R2(a): COPY OF THE INTERIM ORDER PASSED BY THIS HON'BLE COURT, DATED 05/02/2016 IN OP.(FC).NO.53/2016. ANNEXURE R2(b): COPY OF THE ORDER DATED 06/02/2016 IN E.P.NO.73/2015 PASSED BY THE FAMILY COURT, ERNAKULAM. ANNEXURE R2(c): COPY OF THE JUDGMENT DATED 06/04/2016 IN OP(FC).NO.53/2016 PASSED BY THE HON'BLE HIGH COURT. 2025:KER:30425 Crl.M.C.No.6264 of 2019 -7- ANNEXURE R2(d): COPY OF THE ORDER DATED 25/07/2016 IN SPECIAL LEAVE APPEAL (C) NO.15442/2016 PASSED BY THE HON'BLE SUPREME COURT.